IADR Abstract Archives
Regression and Stabilization of Proximal Caries Using Separation and Sealing.
Objectives: The aim of this split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of proximal sealing for arresting incipient caries lesions in adults in a one-visit session.
Methods: A total number of 48 patients were selected, who had at least one pair of proximal initial carious lesions. At baseline the patient caries risk was analysed using the Cariogram analysis and both test and control surfaces were examined for mutans streptococci (ms) counts. A metal separator was inserted into the approximal space, which was slowly and gently screwed in intervals until the space between the proximal surfaces was at least 1 mm. This made it possible to diagnose the test surfaces, if a micro-cavity was present or not, before the sealing procedure. After the treatment the participants were asked to describe their pain perception during the separation procedure.
Results: After 2 years, 212 surfaces in 45 subjects were examined by two external clinical observers independently, using standardized digital follow-up radiographs. The sealed test surfaces had regressed or were unchanged in 88% compared to baseline, while for the unsealed control surfaces the corresponding value was 60% (p<0.0001). Of these, regression was found in 67% in the test surfaces and 13% in the untreated surfaces (p<0.0001). There was a 5.6 higher chance for the sealed surfaces to show regression compared to the control surfaces. Neither the caries risk, the surface diagnoses, the ms counts nor the occurrence of a cavitated lesion seemed to influence the caries development. The separation treatment was well accepted by the patients.
Conclusions: The method of separation for diagnose and sealing treatment in a single session seems to be a clinically applicable preventive method for proximal caries lesions.
Methods: A total number of 48 patients were selected, who had at least one pair of proximal initial carious lesions. At baseline the patient caries risk was analysed using the Cariogram analysis and both test and control surfaces were examined for mutans streptococci (ms) counts. A metal separator was inserted into the approximal space, which was slowly and gently screwed in intervals until the space between the proximal surfaces was at least 1 mm. This made it possible to diagnose the test surfaces, if a micro-cavity was present or not, before the sealing procedure. After the treatment the participants were asked to describe their pain perception during the separation procedure.
Results: After 2 years, 212 surfaces in 45 subjects were examined by two external clinical observers independently, using standardized digital follow-up radiographs. The sealed test surfaces had regressed or were unchanged in 88% compared to baseline, while for the unsealed control surfaces the corresponding value was 60% (p<0.0001). Of these, regression was found in 67% in the test surfaces and 13% in the untreated surfaces (p<0.0001). There was a 5.6 higher chance for the sealed surfaces to show regression compared to the control surfaces. Neither the caries risk, the surface diagnoses, the ms counts nor the occurrence of a cavitated lesion seemed to influence the caries development. The separation treatment was well accepted by the patients.
Conclusions: The method of separation for diagnose and sealing treatment in a single session seems to be a clinically applicable preventive method for proximal caries lesions.